whoever it is he reads that day.whatever he's been told to think that day.

Corrected that for you.

Careful, Blackadar, I've been told that there is nothing constructive about goading members of the lesser party. I meant "other" party! "Other"! Fuck.

msduncan appears to have used the Heritage foundation blog again today - the link he quotes in the OP here is from this blog post.

Many people will do just enough research to support their pre-conceived notions and that's it. These opinions were often formed during childhood - most often from family or their own particular religion. They're not interested in analyizing those beliefs, only justifying them. As such, they'll browse those sites that only agree with them and then wonder why they're laughed at when they post those links here. I don't have a lot of patience with people who can be categorized as sheep. On this board, a number of conservative posters happen to fall into this category (and a few liberals as well).

(WARNING - self-serving examples below. Read at the risk of nausea)-----------For example, my pro-choice stance came after a lot of research, including reading a number of pro-life books (including looking at shock pictures). Now religious dogma may say "life begins at conception" but there's no scientific consensus. As such, I came to conclude that a balanced approach - while satisfying no one - is probably the best approach and that Roe v. Wade was probably as good a decision as can be made. As such, my decision was made from a scientific viability standpoint - without a consensus on when life starts, the rights of the mother must outweigh the rights of the fetus at least until viability (typically around 24-28 weeks). On the States Rights vs. Federal Rights issue, it comes down to a matter of personal liberties. If a state says that abortions are illegal, then it's pretty obvious that decision was made from a religious standpoint given the lack of consensus in the scientific community. Hence, the state is favoring one class (fetus) over another (women) on a decision based on religion. I believe that's unconstitutional....and therefore the Federal government has an obligation to step in.

My pro-2nd Amendment stance came after similar research. While I detest guns, I believe the founding fathers fully intended to allow personal firearms to be owned by private citizens as a protection against Government tyranny. It's pretty obvious given the way this country was formed what those 16 words mean.

Global warming is another one. I've read books and articles from Al Gore to David Douglas. The vast majority of scientific data - and there are far better minds than mine looking at this stuff - indicates that it's happening. What finally clinched it for me was watching the opinions of the anti-global warming group shift from "it's not happening" to "it's a natural warming". Uh, those two aren't congruent opinions. You can't go from one to another without admitting you were wrong in the first place. Plus, if anyone is watching where most of anti-warming group's funding is coming from (Exxon and other business segments that have a financial interest in not reducing emissions), it's not hard to figure out what's really happening if you're really interested in the truth rather than a position that someone told you to have on Faux News. ----------(self serving, nausea-causing examples over)

It's unfortunate, but I've found few - especially religious conservatives - who have undertaken any such comprehensive research. Therefore, they continue to parrot the dogma with no real understanding behind it. I've gotten to the point that I have little to no respect for such people, and I'm sure it shows. I'd much rather go at it with someone who is actually informed about such issues.

It may be popular to hate on the major US oil producers but it doesn't change the supply and demand problems we face.

1) Build new high tech coal power plants - we need more energy production across the national power grid.

2) Government funded X-Prize contest for the best affordable solar panel kit - Requirements: 8'X4' panels with retrofit mounting hardware (facia boards, chimney or roof jacks). No battery storage systems for this first stage.. we just run the power right back into the grid via the utility box. Install 5,000,000 of these passive units and put them on the roofs of homes in LA and the California Central Valley. In fact most western states will benefit from this.

3) Hydroelectric power is truly green power: Design new fish ladders as this is one of the major sticking points for environmental groups.. all other complaints are just cock-blocks. White water kayaking and rafting on the Tumwater? tough shit and get over it.

It may be popular to hate on the major US oil producers but it doesn't change the supply and demand problems we face.

1) Build new high tech coal power plants - we need more energy production across the national power grid.

2) Government funded X-Prize contest for the best affordable solar panel kit - Requirements: 8'X4' panels with retrofit mounting hardware (facia boards, chimney or roof jacks). No battery storage systems for this first stage.. we just run the power right back into the grid via the utility box. Install 5,000,000 of these passive units and put them on the roofs of homes in LA and the California Central Valley. In fact most western states will benefit from this.

3) Hydroelectric power is truly green power: Design new fish ladders as this is one of the major sticking points for environmental groups.. all other complaints are just cock-blocks. White water kayaking and rafting on the Tumwater? tough shit and get over it.

Thoughts and impressions?

I think you're right on, other than needing to add a few more energy options. For example, wind turbines are pretty much ready to go and could provide significant energy. Nuclear also has to be considered, if not on the scale McCain has suggested. We also need to be willing to exploit our own oil reserves, such as offshore drilling. However, no matter what we need to come to terms with the idea that our energy demands require taking some risks and doing some things that are not ideal.

Basically, we need to reduce reliance on oil and that means shifting to a variety of alternatives while we wait to see if/when something major develops with hydrogen or something like that.

Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.Syndey: That's alright. I have both.

3) Hydroelectric power is truly green power: Design new fish ladders as this is one of the major sticking points for environmental groups.. all other complaints are just cock-blocks. White water kayaking and rafting on the Tumwater? tough shit and get over it.

I kayak and raft. You can find other rivers and other locations to dam, but leave me my class Vs.

Actually, you probably need to do a little more research on the economy of some of these towns. Tourism is their #1 draw. Screw that up in any town and you just shut down a bunch of small businesses and destroyed a community.

I only caught a part of a news clip on PBS, but during a Congressman Rahm Emanuel speech or press conference, he citied information that something on the order of 68% of all sea floor already under lease by oil industries for exploratory drilling and oil production is currently unused.

Can someone help a fella out with how they come up with this? And why if they are only use 32% of what they have now, what's the rush for leasing new areas from where they are currently barred from exploring? Is it just an industry desire to find out if the grass is greener in protected areas? Pushing the limits while they can know for sure this Executive Branch is more tolerant, and some of the Legislative Houses are Energy scared?

Pushing the limits while they can know for sure this Executive Branch is more tolerant, and some of the Legislative Houses are Energy scared?

Bingo.

Big oil would have you believe that the 68 million acres of leases they're just sitting on are all worthless. Even if it produced oil at 50% efficiency of their existing utilized leases, they'd be pumping an additional 2.1 million barrels of oil. ANWR's max daily capacity is estimated at 800,000.

Dams create new recreation opportunities and actually increase business profit to the local region. Shasta Lake is a perfect example of this in action. Oroville Dam and the two after-bays provide excellent mountain biking trails, camping, sailing, canoing, picnicking, sail boarding, fishing, water skiing, tubing, house boating and even.. radio control clubs hang out and race their models on the glass flat waters of the after bay.

I've not only done my research I've worked directly with the USFS to build single track motorcycle trails on the Western Slope of the Plumas National Forest. I spent 10 years working on OHV user projects including donating the time, labor and material to repair warming huts, natural spring drinking water sources, pit toilet huts and even painted them to boot.. and on my dime. Me and a bunch of buddies spent many weekends mapping old skidder trails and even re-discovered part of an old Indian migration trail. I've logged hundreds and hundreds of volunteer hours to help make OUR outdoor recreation areas a better place to visit.

I was going to amend myself on the snippet I heard, rather than being 68% of unused leased land, it is in fact 68 Million acres of unused leased land.

Thanks for beating me to it, Blackdar.

I'm not brilliant, but what I see is companies claiming they have nowhere to refine oil, yet they will not jump through the hoops and pay the expenses to building refineries with their profits. They won't drill where they are allowed to drill, because they want a crisis situation to leverage a change about drilling in protected land/sea.

I realize there are costs in time and money to build Oil rigs and refineries, but if I want to build my business, I have to do the work myself, and within the relevant laws. Why should it be different for them? And how does this situation come to pass without the oil companies either showing willful hostaging of the economy at worst or the gross ignorance about the projected growth in their markets? People have been talking about the rise of India's economy for at least ten years. China a little less so, maybe 5-6 years. Who failed to make the connection some time ago that these two large world populations would soon afford oil and failed to adjust for it?

I think you all overestimate how much control US companies have over the price of oil, 94% of the worlds proven oil reserves are controlled by state owned companies in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, ect. That is why new areas need to be explored in the US as much of the current leases that arent being used are not being used because they dont feel there is much recoverable oil on them.

That is why new areas need to be explored in the US as much of the current leases that arent being used are not being used because they dont feel there is much recoverable oil on them.

That's BS. The oil companies don't buy up leases that they know (or even suspect) are dry. You can't tell me that in the outer continental shelf, there are 8,000 leases covering 80% of the oil has been identified and *somehow* there's no oil there, but *somehow* there's oil in the other 20%. This is a politically (and economically) timed land-grab, nothing more. Look at the yearly financial statements of big oil and the amount of oil they say they already have in reserve...it's an eye opener.

And it's interesting that according to your own graph, we have 150,000 troops sitting on the 3rd largest oil field in the world, but we somehow we have to drill here?